Summary of Argument

While perceived by adults as offensive or vulgar, much teenage behavior and expression among their peers is a normative feature of adolescent identity development. Recent research on brain development suggests that adolescent speech deemed objectionable by adults is not only normal, but driven by brain systems that cause teenagers to be sensitive to social status and the rewards of playing to their peers. It is also widely known that teenagers say and do outrageous things among their friends.

Teenagers mocking school administrators is not a new phenomenon. When these expressions contain sexual content, adults commonly imbue them with significance or meaning not shared by the teenagers themselves. Juvenile attempts at humor that, for example, make unspecific joking references to sex addiction, are hardly on par with serious accusations against a school official for child abuse.

Given that this speech is normal, and made outside of the school setting, suspending a student for uttering the speech is unjustified. The panel majority’s expansive opinion below stretches the limited power of school officials to punish student speech beyond reasonable bounds. Allowed to stand, it opens the door to an unprecedented era in which adolescents can be punished for expression that is normal for teenagers, if sometimes uncomfortable for adults. The decision below thus has the potential to drastically alter the First Amendment rights of minors outside of the school setting, and therefore warrants further consideration via rehearing en banc.

Summary of Argument

The adolescent use of language, often perceived as offensive or vulgar by adults, is a typical aspect of identity formation. Research on brain development indicates that such speech is a consequence of heightened social sensitivity and peer reward systems prevalent during adolescence. Teenagers' tendency to engage in outrageous behavior and speech among their peers is widely acknowledged.

While teenagers mocking school authorities is not an unprecedented occurrence, the attribution of significant meaning to their expressions, particularly when they involve sexual content, is often misplaced. The juvenile nature of their humor, which may include unspecific, joking references to sex addiction, should not be equated with serious accusations of child abuse against school officials.

Given the normalcy of such speech and its occurrence outside the school setting, the suspension of a student for uttering such language is unjustified. The panel majority's broad interpretation of the school officials' power to punish student speech extends beyond reasonable limits. If upheld, it could usher in an era where adolescents are penalized for expressions that are commonplace among their peers, albeit potentially uncomfortable for adults. This decision has the potential to significantly curtail the First Amendment rights of minors outside the school environment and therefore necessitates further scrutiny through a rehearing en banc.

Summary of Argument

Adolescent behavior, often perceived as offensive by adults, is a natural part of identity development. Recent brain research indicates that teenagers' seemingly objectionable speech is driven by brain systems that make them highly attuned to social status and the rewards of peer acceptance. It's common for teenagers to engage in outrageous behavior and speech amongst their peers.

While teenagers mocking school officials isn't new, the panel majority's expansive interpretation of the power of school officials to punish student speech goes beyond reasonable limits. Attributing serious meaning to juvenile humor that contains sexual content, like unspecific jokes about sex addiction, misinterprets the intent of teenagers. The decision below could potentially restrict the First Amendment rights of minors outside of the school setting, especially when their speech is typical adolescent behavior.

This decision warrants further consideration through a rehearing en banc due to its potential to drastically alter the rights of minors.

Summary of Argument

Many teenagers use language and behavior that adults find offensive or inappropriate. This is a normal part of growing up and figuring out who they are. New research shows that the teenage brain is wired to be sensitive to social status and the rewards of fitting in with their peers, which can lead them to say and do things that seem shocking to adults.

Mocking school administrators is common among teenagers, but adults often misinterpret their jokes and give them more meaning than the teenagers intended. For instance, a teenager's off-color joke about sex addiction isn't the same as accusing an adult of child abuse.

Since this type of speech is normal and happens outside of school, it's not fair to suspend a student for it. The court's decision gives school officials too much power to punish students for speech that's typical for teenagers, even if adults don't like it. This could seriously limit the free speech rights of minors outside of school and needs to be reviewed by a larger panel of judges.

Summary of Argument

Sometimes teenagers say things that adults think are offensive. But this is normal for teenagers because their brains are still developing. Teenagers care a lot about what their friends think, and they want to be cool. So, they might say things that are funny or mean to impress their friends.

For example, teenagers sometimes make jokes about school staff, but they don't really mean it. They are just trying to be funny or get attention. Adults shouldn't punish teenagers for saying these things, especially if they are not saying them at school.